Discussion:
[linux-elitists] open linklogging, anyone?
Don Marti
2013-03-24 22:27:06 UTC
Permalink
Hey, so Google is shutting down Google Reader.
(yeah, yeah, I know... http://xkcd.com/743/ ...beat
you to it.) and a thousand RSS flowers are blooming.

Anyone else doing a linklog feed on your own site?
I have this:

http://rtwt.aloodo.com/feed

which is just links to stuff. It's based on a
fairly ugly minimal feed reader thing that snarfs
and scores almost 6,000 feeds, some of which are just
other linklogs.

It seems like it should be possible to have a
decoupled network of RSS in, RSS out things, with
each site maintaining its own subscription list and
sorting system.
--
Don Marti +1-510-332-1587 (mobile)
http://zgp.org/~dmarti/ Alameda, California, USA
***@zgp.org
Shlomi Fish
2013-03-25 02:23:54 UTC
Permalink
Hi Don,

On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 15:27:06 -0700
Post by Don Marti
Hey, so Google is shutting down Google Reader.
(yeah, yeah, I know... http://xkcd.com/743/ ...beat
you to it.) and a thousand RSS flowers are blooming.
Anyone else doing a linklog feed on your own site?
http://rtwt.aloodo.com/feed
Seems political. :-(.
Post by Don Marti
which is just links to stuff. It's based on a
fairly ugly minimal feed reader thing that snarfs
and scores almost 6,000 feeds, some of which are just
other linklogs.
It seems like it should be possible to have a
decoupled network of RSS in, RSS out things, with
each site maintaining its own subscription list and
sorting system.
my RSS feed aggregator (not Google Reader, mind) has become a disaster area,
with many feeds accumulating and me spending too much time on it. This reminded
me of how an Electrical Engineer I talked with once described the trickle of
data points in the noise as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_noise - i.e:
very small amplitude noise, whose integral within any finite duration is
zero. And Paul Graham agrees with it:

http://www.paulgraham.com/opensource.html

Quoting from it:

[QUOTE]
I know that from my own experience as a reader. Though most print publications
are online, I probably read two or three articles on individual people's sites
for every one I read on the site of a newspaper or magazine.

And when I read, say, New York Times stories, I never reach them through the
Times front page. Most I find through aggregators like Google News or Slashdot
or Delicious. Aggregators show how much better you can do than the channel. The
New York Times front page is a list of articles written by people who work for
the New York Times. Delicious is a list of articles that are interesting. And
it's only now that you can see the two side by side that you notice how little
overlap there is.

Most articles in the print media are boring. For example, the president notices
that a majority of voters now think invading Iraq was a mistake, so he makes an
address to the nation to drum up support. Where is the man bites dog in that? I
didn't hear the speech, but I could probably tell you exactly what he said. A
speech like that is, in the most literal sense, not news: there is nothing new
in it. [3]

Nor is there anything new, except the names and places, in most "news" about
things going wrong. A child is abducted; there's a tornado; a ferry sinks;
someone gets bitten by a shark; a small plane crashes. And what do you learn
about the world from these stories? Absolutely nothing. They're outlying data
points; what makes them gripping also makes them irrelevant.
[/QUOTE]

So reading a lot of boring RSS feeds to find something interesting seems like a
waste of time for me. Usually, I just visit some channels and blogs on various
places like http://www.youtube.com/user/zeldaxlove64 (Christina Grimmie) ;
http://www.youtube.com/user/TiffanyAlvord ; http://esr.ibiblio.org/ (Eric S.
Raymond) ; http://twitter.com/ (the stuff Twitter aggregated) ;
http://perlweekly.com/ (Perl Weekly by Gabor Szabo) ; etc. And I also chat
with people on IRC, IM and email and still am subscribed to mailing lists. Then
I sort of hope that I'll notice the most important thing.

Naturally, people who do monitor RSS feeds are doing a good service, but I'm
not that kind of person.

Regards,

Shlomi Fish



P.S: after I've written this post, here are some links stuff I've published
recently as a kind of shameless self-promotion. Feel free to ignore:

* Buffy Facts:
http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Buffy/

* Facts about the National Security Agency (NSA):
http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/NSA/

*
http://blogs.perl.org/users/shlomi_fish/2013/03/screenplay-text-alternative.html
- XML-Grammar-Screenplay: Alternative Format for Hollywood Screenplays

*
http://blogs.perl.org/users/shlomi_fish/2013/03/ann-my-transition-from-software-developer-to-writerentertaineramateur-philosopherinternet-celebrity.html

ANN: My Transition
Andy Bennett
2013-03-25 09:51:59 UTC
Permalink
Hi,
Post by Don Marti
Anyone else doing a linklog feed on your own site?
I use Newspipe to fetch my RSS feeds and then inject them into my
mailbox via SMTP. I then sort them into a folder and read them via IMAP
so that I get my SEEN state on all clients.

http://newspipe.sourceforge.net/

It can either fetch the whole article or just the RSS summaries: that's
configurable per feed or group of feeds.

It's pretty good and for the few years I've been using it has been
maintenance free other than poking new feeds into the config file every
now and then.

It occasionally suffers from that weirdo Wordpress bug where the
Wordpress admin edits one of their articles and it causes all articles
currently in that feed to become unread again, but I've never used a
feedreader that didn't suffer from that. It seems to be a Wordpress
thing but I've never taken the pains to track it down.






Regards,
@ndy
--
***@ashurst.eu.org
http://www.ashurst.eu.org/
0x7EBA75FF
Teh Entar-Nick
2013-03-25 10:03:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Marti
Anyone else doing a linklog feed on your own site?
I'm not sure what that really means, formally, but those of us who still
use IRC have kept this thing around:

http://click.olinko.net/
--
You are in an open field west of a big white house
with a boarded front door.
There is a small mailbox here.
Post by Don Marti
_
Don Marti
2013-03-25 12:26:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
Post by Don Marti
Anyone else doing a linklog feed on your own site?
I'm not sure what that really means, formally, but those of us who still
http://click.olinko.net/
I saw it on Wikipedia, so it must be a thing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linklog

"clickolinko, the automatic web log" definitely
qualifies. Thank you.
--
Don Marti +1-510-332-1587 (mobile)
http://zgp.org/~dmarti/ Alameda, California, USA
***@zgp.org
Teh Entar-Nick
2013-03-25 13:48:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Marti
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
I'm not sure what that really means, formally, but
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linklog
Weird. This is the original definition of "weblog", you realize. Jorn
Barger was just logging all the interesting Web pages he'd gone to, with
a short comment.
--
Man, I love how everyone is like "In my blog, which is
a blog on the Internet, which you all may be interested
in visiting, I talked about what I am now saying here."
-- George Moffitt
Don Marti
2013-03-26 04:01:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
Post by Don Marti
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
I'm not sure what that really means, formally, but
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linklog
Weird. This is the original definition of "weblog", you realize. Jorn
Barger was just logging all the interesting Web pages he'd gone to, with
a short comment.
Today, different people's definitions are all over
the place...

It's like a press release, except we can use links
and curse words!

It's like an column, except you sign over your
copyright, we don't copy-edit it, and we pay you
less!

It's my diary except that...well, um, it's exactly
like my diary!
--
Don Marti +1-510-332-1587 (mobile)
http://zgp.org/~dmarti/ Alameda, California, USA
***@zgp.org
Shlomi Fish
2013-03-26 07:42:31 UTC
Permalink
Hi Don,

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 21:01:04 -0700
Post by Don Marti
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
Post by Don Marti
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
I'm not sure what that really means, formally, but
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linklog
Weird. This is the original definition of "weblog", you realize. Jorn
Barger was just logging all the interesting Web pages he'd gone to, with
a short comment.
Today, different people's definitions are all over
the place...
It's like a press release, except we can use links
and curse words!
It's like an column, except you sign over your
copyright, we don't copy-edit it, and we pay you
less!
It's my diary except that...well, um, it's exactly
like my diary!
Heh, that's nice. However, you should read
http://www.paulgraham.com/opensource.html :

[QUOTE]
It was the narrowness of such channels that made professionals seem so superior
to amateurs. There were only a few jobs as professional journalists, for
example, so competition ensured the average journalist was fairly good. Whereas
anyone can express opinions about current events in a bar. And so the average
person expressing his opinions in a bar sounds like an idiot compared to a
journalist writing about the subject.

On the Web, the barrier for publishing your ideas is even lower. You don't have
to buy a drink, and they even let kids in. Millions of people are publishing
online, and the average level of what they're writing, as you might expect, is
not very good. This has led some in the media to conclude that blogs don't
present much of a threat-- that blogs are just a fad.

Actually, the fad is the word "blog," at least the way the print media now use
it. What they mean by "blogger" is not someone who publishes in a weblog
format, but anyone who publishes online. That's going to become a problem as
the Web becomes the default medium for publication. So I'd like to suggest an
alternative word for someone who publishes online. How about "writer?"

Those in the print media who dismiss the writing online because of its low
average quality are missing an important point: no one reads the average blog.
In the old world of channels, it meant something to talk about average quality,
because that's what you were getting whether you liked it or not. But now you
can read any writer you want. So the average quality of writing online isn't
what the print media are competing against. They're competing against the best
writing online. And, like Microsoft, they're losing.

I know that from my own experience as a reader. Though most print publications
are online, I probably read two or three articles on individual people's sites
for every one I read on the site of a newspaper or magazine.

And when I read, say, New York Times stories, I never reach them through the
Times front page. Most I find through aggregators like Google News or Slashdot
or Delicious. Aggregators show how much better you can do than the channel. The
New York Times front page is a list of articles written by people who work for
the New York Times. Delicious is a list of articles that are interesting. And
it's only now that you can see the two side by side that you notice how little
overlap there is.

[/QUOTE]

Again, I recall going over the livejournal.com most recent posts feed
( http://www.livejournal.com/stats/latest.bml - nowadays it's mostly in
Russian and other Eastern European languages, but it wasn't always this way),
and frankly, most of it was a lot of teenagers telling what they did that day
or the day before. But like Paul Graham said, if a blog post reaches
http://slashdot.org/ or climbs to the top of one of the major sub-reddits in
http://reddit.com/ , then it is usually interesting and notable enough for
reading. And most blog posts that appear there are perfectly fine articles or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essay (see http://www.paulgraham.com/essay.html )
in their own right.

Looking back at the first blog posts I've written (see
http://www.advogato.org/person/shlomif/diary.html?start=9 ) then I can testify
that they were not too interesting or things of note, and even contained some
rumours or defamation. But my blogging improved since then. If you don't
practise writing, you're not going to improve.

"Blogging" in this sense still existed back in the old Usenet days, where
people posted various essays to Usenet and asked for opinions. Usenet fell out
of fashion recently, and tends to have a lot more spam than it used to, but
might make a comeback, and in the meanwhile, there are plenty of alternative
Internet mediums for publishing essays and articles. To quote
http://bible.cc/ecclesiastes/1-9.htm “What has been will be again, what has
been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.” - people
have been posting essays (or whatever[1]) starting from the Cuneiform, and then
using the Alphabet, the print, typesetting systems, word processors, HTML/Web
1.0, Blogs/wikis/etc. and finally raw text+URLs social networks such as
Facebook, Twitter or Google Plus.

As a result, I think we shouldn't be quick to dismiss a newer or trendier
technology just because it has a lower barrier to entry (like it was easier to
set up a blog on livejournal.com or whatever than it was to write HTML as a web
page), just because it has a lower barrier to entry, or because it is more
mainstream, or because the median result is not too high. [OlderIsNotWorse] Of
course, I have seen quite a few fads too that quickly went away (e.g:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_technology , which is now mostly RSS/Atom ),
but I don't expect technologies such as Google Plus , Facebook or Twitter, to
quickly disappear, because they fill an important niche and we should embrace
this change. (Although it is possible that, in the future, they will go out of
business and replaced by a different provider, like Facebook has taken over
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myspace , which hardly anyone remembers now).

As demonstrated by the English Wikipedia and other Wikimedia and wiki sites, it
is possible for a close-to-100% open source/open content solution to become the
category killer of online reference sites, so there is a future for good
alternatives.

Switching to GNU/Linux may still be pretty intimidating for most
desktop users, but some FOSS programs such as
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/index.html have become very popular on Windows or
Macintosh systems too due to their high quality, and people who use a lot of
FOSS on Windows, and end up trying Linux on VirtualBox or whatever may end up
either using GNU/Linux as a host or alternatively doing most of their work in
a Linux/etc. VM or a remote X11 desktop system (which I did in my last
workplace, where I had a VM running Ubuntu Linux and it was a tolerable
experience.)

Sorry for getting carried away, but I hope you enjoyed this post, which can
provide fodder for some blog posts or whatever.

Regards,

Shlomi Fish

<Footnotes>

[1] - according to
http://www.jessicarulestheuniverse.com/2008/08/26/sumerian-fart-joke-first-in-the-world/
the oldest joke dates to 1,900 BC and is written in Sumerian.

Taking an objective view of the Hebrew Bible
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanakh ), we can see a lot of adultery,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_%28fiction%29 , spreading of nasty rumours,
curses, lies, sexism, racism (see http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt3001.htm
), erotica (same link), conspiracy theories (see
http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/est.htm ) and most everything else that we
still hold in much contempt during our times.

[OlderIsNotWorse] - I do not mean to
imply that older technologies do not have a place, and while no one is using
cuneiform any more, I was told Jewish scribes ( see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sofer ) are still writing various manuscripts by
hand, because that yields the most quality results, which cannot be achieved -
not even using typesetting.

</Footnotes>
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/
Freecell Solver - http://fc-solve.shlomifish.org/

There is no IGLU Cabal! Home‐made Cabals eventually superseded the power and
influence of the original IGLU Cabal, which was considered a cutting edge
development at its time.

Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .
Teh Entar-Nick
2013-03-26 09:48:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
Post by Don Marti
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linklog
Weird. This is the original definition of "weblog", you realize. Jorn
Barger was just logging all the interesting Web pages he'd gone to, with
a short comment.
Today, different people's definitions are all over the place...
It's like a press release, except we can use links and curse words!
It's like a column, except you sign over your copyright, we don't
copy-edit it, and we pay you less!
It's my diary except that...well, um, it's exactly like my diary!
Well I took all these as the many meanings of "blog". I kept "weblog"
around for exactly this kind of log-of-links format. It's a log of Web
browsing, hence weblog.

I'm not that attached to it, but it's a bit absurd that someone thinks
they've invented something worth coining a new term.
--
Information gladly given, but safety requires
avoiding unnecessary conversation.
Jason White
2013-03-31 06:15:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Teh Entar-Nick
Post by Don Marti
Anyone else doing a linklog feed on your own site?
I'm not sure what that really means, formally, but those of us who still
http://click.olinko.net/
And what's the substitute for IRC nowadays? XMPP multi-user chat? StatusNet
(soon to become pump.io) and its proprietary counterparts?

Someone who is well versed in the mathematics of reputation systems and
machine learning algorithms should be able to write an RSS reader that quite
effectively identifies articles of interest to each user. It would be
interesting to determine whether a relevance calculation based on what
friends/colleagues/acquaintances approve would out-perform a textual
classifier, or whether a combination of the two would be more reliable.

As the volume of online communication grows ever larger, there will need to be
much more investment in filtering techniques; and I hope that free/open-source
software is at the forefront of these developments.

If I remember rightly, CRM114 has been used to classify news articles; it's a
general-purpose tool, not just a spam filter (even though many of us use it in
the latter application).

Tony Finch
2013-03-27 13:17:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Marti
Anyone else doing a linklog feed on your own site?
http://dotat.at/:/

Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch <***@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/
Forties, Cromarty: East, veering southeast, 4 or 5, occasionally 6 at first.
Rough, becoming slight or moderate. Showers, rain at first. Moderate or good,
occasionally poor at first.
Don Marti
2013-03-27 14:56:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Finch
Post by Don Marti
Anyone else doing a linklog feed on your own site?
http://dotat.at/:/
Thank you -- good one.

Marco Arment writes, about high-volume feeds,
"It’s not enough to interleave their posts
into a “river” or “stream” paradigm,
where only the most recent N items are shown
in one big, combined, reverse-chronological
list (much like a Twitter timeline), because
many of them would get buried in the noise of
higher-volume feeds and people’s tweets." --
http://www.marco.org/2013/03/26/power-of-rss

Personally, I think that a scored river design has
potential. So my thing can be polling >5000 feeds
and still show this Matthew Garrett piece fairly
close to the top:

http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/23817.html

because that one got linked to from LWN and other
places.
--
Don Marti +1-510-332-1587 (mobile)
http://zgp.org/~dmarti/ Alameda, California, USA
***@zgp.org
s***@thepromisedlan.org
2013-03-28 18:54:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Marti
Post by Don Marti
Anyone else doing a linklog feed on your own site?
I use venus (http://intertwingly.net/code/venus/) like the popular
planet.<project>.org sites but just as a personal aggregation (mostly)
in lieu of any desktop or mobile agg program:

http://planet.promisedlan.org

Maybe it's just me but I've never really longed for the "mark as read"
feature that is the piece obviously missing.

While looking for the intertwingly link ( I always look for venus code
at the older planetplanet.org and wonder why I can't find the current
code ;) help jdub! ) I saw that there's some work going into giving
venus some of those features:
http://lists.planetplanet.org/archives/devel/2013-March/002265.html
Post by Don Marti
Marco Arment writes, about high-volume feeds,
"It’s not enough to interleave their posts
into a “river” or “stream” paradigm,
where only the most recent N items are shown
in one big, combined, reverse-chronological
list (much like a Twitter timeline), because
many of them would get buried in the noise of
higher-volume feeds and people’s tweets." --
http://www.marco.org/2013/03/26/power-of-rss
Agreed. Though, maybe just due to low volume, this hasn't bothered me
much. But it's also totally possible that I'm missing gems and enjoying
the bliss of ignorance.
Post by Don Marti
Personally, I think that a scored river design has
potential. So my thing can be polling >5000 feeds
and still show this Matthew Garrett piece fairly
Sounds great.
--
sam
Loading...